If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Redszone Community Prospect Vote #19

Vote for the player who you think is the Reds #19 prospect (the best prospect who is not yet on the list). We will go with this as far as you guys want to take it.

I will post a new list every 2 days with 10-15 options to vote on.

If you feel like making an argument on why a guy should be voted here, feel free to vote and state why you voted for that player.

If there is someone that is not currently listed as an option to vote on, vote for 'other' then just state who you want to vote for in the thread.

If there is anyone you would like to see as an option on the next poll, just say so and if they garner enough support, they will be placed on the next poll. Guys with the lowest amount of votes will usually be removed for the next few guys who were talked about in the previous thread.

Re: Redszone Community Prospect Vote #19

Vote Pellend over Violo, otherwise both will lose to Thompson.....
For those who think Thompson is better anyway, if you look at the chance of having a positive impact to the team, it has to be Pellend.
Thompson pitched in A+ and projects to be a 5th guy at best.
Pellend pitched in AAA and improved tremendously with his control after being switched to a reliever. He has a good chance to help the Reds next year.
Violo pitched in AA and was very good. Violo had better stats and might be better but the only reason why he's below Pellend is because he most likely won't help next year.

I think that once it gets down to the lower end of prospects, such as around 20, it's better to rank players on their chance at helping the ML team over guys who are at the lower level but might have more potential.

Re: Redszone Community Prospect Vote #19

1 extra year means 1 more year where the prospect can do bad or do good. It's the risk in prospects. At this point in the rankings, I'd rather take prospects that have less risk to never make the majors.
Thompson is just so far from actually being an ML players. It's far more likely that he'll be released due to the Rule 5, be a minor league FA, or just stop playing than actually playing in MLB. Violo's first year playing for a minor league team was last year, and he's pitched 19 innings in AA. Pellend pitched very well in AAA as a reliever. Both are the same age.

Re: Redszone Community Prospect Vote #19

Originally Posted by Kc61

Anyone who won't vote for a relief pitcher should be required to watch tapes of Mike Stanton and Gary Majewski pitching last year.

Inability by the Reds to put together a decent bullpen doesn't make them any more or less valuable. They are what they are. Guys that pitch about 3-4 innings a week. The impact that they make, even on the positive side of things is very limited.

Re: Redszone Community Prospect Vote #19

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Inability by the Reds to put together a decent bullpen doesn't make them any more or less valuable. They are what they are. Guys that pitch about 3-4 innings a week. The impact that they make, even on the positive side of things is very limited.

A bad bullpen causes blown leads and demoralizing losses. The Reds pen last year graphically shows the impact that a weak pen can have on a team.

You choose to measure relievers by number of innings thrown. How about the number of appearances? A reliever who pitches in 65 or 70 games, sometimes for multiple innings, is a key man. A closer pitching in tight games is a key man.

If relievers are so unimportant, how come Redszoners spent so much energy focusing on the bullpen performances last year. Why was Burton's improvement so significant?

We're now in a poll voting for guys who likely will be backup infielders and long-shot major league starters. I'll take the major league ready reliever, Pelland.

Re: Redszone Community Prospect Vote #19

Originally Posted by Kc61

A bad bullpen causes blown leads and demoralizing losses. The Reds pen last year graphically shows the impact that a weak pen can have on a team.

It still doesn't make them overly that valuable as individuals. A bad bullpen as a whole sucks, a good bullpen as a whole is awesome. 1 good bullpen arm though is only going to be used for maybe 75 innings a year. Thats about a third of real good starter and about a thirteenth of a position player. Relievers have their value, but lets not overstate how important that actually are, especially as individuals.

You choose to measure relievers by number of innings thrown. How about the number of appearances? A reliever who pitches in 65 or 70 games, sometimes for multiple innings, is a key man. A closer pitching in tight games is a key man.

Appearances mean little. If a guy gets 100 pinch hit at bats in a season it doesn't make him a really good player, even if he hit .300 in those 100 at bats. He obviously had value, but he wasn't nearly as good as an every day player hitting .275. Closers are important, but they aren't anywhere near as valuable as even a decent #3 starting pitcher. I would take a solid #3 over any closer in the history of baseball for any 1, 2, 3 or 4 year stretch. They just provide your team with a lot more.

If relievers are so unimportant, how come Redszoners spent so much energy focusing on the bullpen performances last year. Why was Burton's improvement so significant?

Because the team had a horrible bullpen. They had 2 guys that were even halfways decent and then a whole bunch of guys that were struggling big time. My point being, even for how well Burton and Weathers were for our bullpen last year, according to this article Matt Belisle still was of more value to the team last year.... and he wasn't even close to being a #3 pitcher in terms of the numbers he put up (despite the fact that I feel he will rebound just fine next year).

We're now in a poll voting for guys who will be backup infielders and long-shot major league starters. I'll take the major league ready reliever, Pelland.

I don't know about that. We are talking about potential starting guys (Valaika is still there who has plenty of potential) as well as guys with high cielings but we know little about (Hildenbrant) or raw athletes with big time tools (Reed) as well as backup infielder types (Turner) and relievers (Pelland/Viola/McBeth) and swing men that could be back and forth between the pen and rotation (Lecure).

Re: Redszone Community Prospect Vote #19

I simply feel that Viola is a better reliever than Pelland. He had a 3 to 1 strikeout to walk ratio, more strikeouts than innings, a 1.42 ERA, and a 1.03 Whip. It will remain to be seen how he does at AAA, but for now I have to continue voting for him over Pelland.

Re: Redszone Community Prospect Vote #19

I'm going with Daryl Thompson, the starting pitcher who is yet to throw a pitch as a 22 year old. He has a good fastball, curveball, and changeup. He also has good strikeout numbers and could very well be in AA to start the season.

And when you throw in the words "at best" when talking about projection, you're actually talking about ceiling. Thompson has the ceiling of a solid #3.

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball